The subject of this research is social relations arising from the qualification of thefts committed using information and telecommunication technologies, focusing on computer fraud under Article 159.6 of the Russian Criminal Code. The study analyzes debatable approaches to determining the form of this theft, criteria for distinguishing it from theft and classic fraud, and the issue of competition of criminal law norms, including the need for additional qualification under Chapter 28. Typical crime schemes are summarized based on judicial practice, and problematic aspects of stealing bonus points (tokens) are examined. The author identifies discrepancies between doctrinal approaches and judicial practice, formulating recommendations for uniform application of criminal law norms. The research uses dialectical and formal-logical methods, along with formal-legal, comparative-legal, judicial practice generalization, and concrete sociological analysis of criminal case materials. Scientific novelty lies in a comprehensive analysis of typical computer fraud schemes based on current judicial practice, revealing discrepancies between theoretical qualification and actual court findings. The work proposes a differentiated approach to assessing the moment of property seizure in cases of unlawful crediting of bonus points, arguing that bonuses should not be recognized as the subject of theft under Article 159.6. It formulates criteria for distinguishing computer fraud from theft when the input and modification of computer information merely create conditions for subsequent secret seizure. Furthermore, it substantiates the inadmissibility of automatic qualification in aggregate with Chapter 28 articles in the absence of an independent object of encroachment beyond Article 159.6. This contributes to resolving the problem of competition of criminal law norms and contradictions between doctrinal approaches and the explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
Evgeniya Mikhailovna Popova (Sun,) studied this question.